Are there any non-vocal languages?

[harmor]

I'm assuming you can learn it with Linguistics.

[Kvantum]

harmor wrote:

I'm assuming you can learn it with Linguistics.

There are a few references in Into the Darklands to "Sakvroth", basically a Drow sign language, but "Drow Sign Language" exists as an FR thing, so it's not really a big deal now. They may have entirely retconned it out of existence for the ISWG, or else it just got omitted as a very minor thing for Golarion.

[Robb Smith]

Pain is a pretty universal language and isn't dependent on sound, is usually relatively effective at communicating intent, and is a trained skill for anyone with a sharp, pointy, or blunt and heavy object.

And humor aside, I don't know of any. If you want a secret language, just take Halfling. Practically nothing in the game besides things with comprehend language (or similar), creatures with very high int scores and no better languages to take, and Halflings will be able to understand you.

[moon glum]

harmor wrote:

I'm assuming you can learn it with Linguistics.

In my home-brew campaign, I have a number of non-vocal languages.

hi-chepri is a chemical language. Normally, only sentient insects can learn it, though some gadgets can let a trained human speak it.

the silent tongue is a drow sign language (ala 1st edition D&D), used for stealthy visual communication.

[Rezdave]

I have allowed PCs to take an Adventurer Hand-signs language to silently communicate stuff like "trap here", "2 opponents in the room ahead" and stuff like that. It's built off the concept of military hand-signals, but with a vocabulary particular to adventuring needs.

FWIW,

Rez

[HappyDaze]

Rezdave wrote:

I have allowed PCs to take an Adventurer Hand-signs language to silently communicate stuff like "trap here", "2 opponents in the room ahead" and stuff like that. It's built off the concept of military hand-signals, but with a vocabulary particular to adventuring needs.

FWIW,

Rez

Many of the PCs in my group would have trouble making use of such a system while adventuring with their heavy shields, weapons, and light sources in hand.

[ShadowcatX]

HappyDaze wrote:

Rezdave wrote:

I have allowed PCs to take an Adventurer Hand-signs language to silently communicate stuff like "trap here", "2 opponents in the room ahead" and stuff like that. It's built off the concept of military hand-signals, but with a vocabulary particular to adventuring needs.

FWIW,

Rez

Many of the PCs in my group would have trouble making use of such a system while adventuring with their heavy shields, weapons, and light sources in hand.

That's why you get creative, you can talk with your whole body if you need, a silent language doesn't have to be exclusively hand signals.

[Cathedron]

ShadowcatX wrote:

That's why you get creative, you can talk with your whole body if you need, a silent language doesn't have to be exclusively hand signals.

+1 Really, non-verbal communication is the simplest of communication. It's reasonable to assume that your party would be paying attention to body language and positioning at the least. If the rogue suddenly dives for cover, you aren't going to stand there and yell, "USE YOUR WORDS!"

Our rule was, if you can communicate it non-verbally at the table, you succeed in-game. It takes surprisingly little effort. Follow, stop, two bad guys ahead, don't touch that, go fornicate yourself; everyone gets that right away.

Edit: I should add that we have always kept Drow Sign Language as a learnable language as long as it is in common use or you can find a Drow to teach it to you. Sometimes you just want the latest gossip while you sneak around.

[Aranai]

Aeons communicate through a "language" called Envisaging, which pretty much amounts to assaulting the mind of the person you're "talking" to with pictures of whatever you're trying to get across.

[Mauril]

Vegepygmy is a language with the following description: "Vegepygmies cannot speak—they communicate via a crude language of rhythmic taps, beats, and clicks."

[LazarX]

Rezdave wrote:

I have allowed PCs to take an Adventurer Hand-signs language to silently communicate stuff like "trap here", "2 opponents in the room ahead" and stuff like that. It's built off the concept of military hand-signals, but with a vocabulary particular to adventuring needs.

FWIW,

Rez

Just note that other adventurer types are likely to recognise the language as well. Just as the heroes in the Belgeriad found out from time to time.

[Jelloarm]

There's an NPC in PFS scenario 2-01, Captain Andre Elanzo, who has Sign Language taken as a language. Canon!

[Daniel Moyer]

In my groups, at my request, we have house-ruled using "Sign"(silent hand motion) and "Signal" (audible noises, includes Whistles & Horns). Both of them are only really effective if at least one other party member takes them, or I suppose your character is a member of a guild/organization. One of my more recent characters even brought back "Thieves' Cant", still trying to get the druid to swap "Druidic" for it. ;)

[HappyDaze]

ShadowcatX wrote:

HappyDaze wrote:

Rezdave wrote:

I have allowed PCs to take an Adventurer Hand-signs language to silently communicate stuff like "trap here", "2 opponents in the room ahead" and stuff like that. It's built off the concept of military hand-signals, but with a vocabulary particular to adventuring needs.

FWIW,

Rez

Many of the PCs in my group would have trouble making use of such a system while adventuring with their heavy shields, weapons, and light sources in hand.

That's why you get creative, you can talk with your whole body if you need, a silent language doesn't have to be exclusively hand signals.

In Pathfinder, such things are covered by Bluff. If you're not the intended target, then Sense Motive can help you to gather the meaning of such body language too, but such things are not really covered by languages/Linguistics in Pathfinder.

[CalebTGordan]

As someone who has to use sign language every day to communicate with the people I work with, I have assumed for a long time now that each race has their own sign language. You could even go so far as to say that different cultures or parts of the world would have their own sign language as well.

As such, if a player asks if they can learn a sign language, I simply ask them to pick a normal language from the list and add (SL) behind it.

There is a rich community of deaf just about anywhere you go in the world today, and it makes sense that the world of Golarian, or any other game world for that matter, if there were different sign languages used by both the deaf and hearing.

In the Belgariad, the rogue character had a sign language that he taught to the main character, and in the Dune Series, there was a sign language that when used with vocal speech would change the meaning of the words.

I would love to attempt to play a deaf character that uses sign languages one day. Possibly an Oracle, but it would be fun to try it with races that don't have the flaw built in. Being deaf wouldn't really be a huge disadvantage if the party knew sign.

[Rezdave]

HappyDaze wrote:

ShadowcatX wrote:

HappyDaze wrote:

Rezdave wrote:

... Adventurer Hand-signs language to silently communicate stuff ...

... would have trouble making use of such a system while adventuring with their heavy shields, weapons, and light sources in hand

... your whole body if you need, a silent language doesn't have to be exclusively hand signals.

In Pathfinder, such things are covered by Bluff... [and] Sense Motive.

SNIP
... such things are not really covered by languages/Linguistics in Pathfinder.

I disagree. If one is trying to convey information through body-language, expression or improvised gestures, then you are correct that Bluff/Sense Motive are the Skills to use.

However, once specific gestures have been codified and formalized to mean specific things, then they function as "words" in precisely the same way specific combinations of sounds cease to be meaningless grunts and noises. Once codified and, more importantly, once taught and shared, then Linguistics would be the proper Skill for such a method of communication.

R.

[Mauril]

That isn't really a matter of codification, but of abstraction. It's a pretty universal pantomime for choking when someone holds their throat with both hands and sticks out their tongue. Pretty much everyone understands this sign and it's pretty universal, but it's not a "language". That would be a simple use of the Bluff/Sense Motive checks (though Bluff is a misleading term here).

Now, when I run the back of my finger along my check, only people who have studied ASL are likely to recognize that I am signing the word for "girl" (assuming I've remembered my signs correctly). This is an instance of language. The sign is very abstracted, especially in this day and age where few young girls wear bonnets.

The hand sign for choking is apparent in the nature of the action. The ASL sign for girl is less so. Just as the "Aaaaaah!" that I shout as the dragon bites my leg is pretty obvious that I am letting you know that I am in pain and am a bit scared, while pronouncing the word "pain" has only an abstract correlation to the feeling that I am experiencing.